<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>
	Comments on: Hard-wired politics: what about changers?	</title>
	<atom:link href="https://thenewneo.com/2012/04/10/hard-wired-politics-what-about-changers/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://thenewneo.com/2012/04/10/hard-wired-politics-what-about-changers/</link>
	<description>A blog about political change, among other things</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 12 Apr 2012 01:32:51 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=7.0.2</generator>
	<item>
		<title>
		By: Steve		</title>
		<link>https://thenewneo.com/2012/04/10/hard-wired-politics-what-about-changers/#comment-341175</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Steve]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 12 Apr 2012 01:32:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://neoneocon.com/?p=15417#comment-341175</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[In the modern context, liberals are not liberal. They are leftist. Conservatives are generally free-market capitalists. Why do some people prefer a large role for the state? Maybe it&#039;s related to the perception that the left is &#039;cooperative&#039; and the right is &#039;competitive.&#039; The left thinks imposing &#039;sharing&#039; works and is a sign of an advanced civilization. The right understands that   the freedom to adapt at the level of the individual is important to having a thriving and stable society. It is the right that is pro-evolution and the left that is trying stupidly to dictate outcomes.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In the modern context, liberals are not liberal. They are leftist. Conservatives are generally free-market capitalists. Why do some people prefer a large role for the state? Maybe it&#8217;s related to the perception that the left is &#8216;cooperative&#8217; and the right is &#8216;competitive.&#8217; The left thinks imposing &#8216;sharing&#8217; works and is a sign of an advanced civilization. The right understands that   the freedom to adapt at the level of the individual is important to having a thriving and stable society. It is the right that is pro-evolution and the left that is trying stupidly to dictate outcomes.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: IGotBupkis, Legally Defined Cyberbully in All 57 States		</title>
		<link>https://thenewneo.com/2012/04/10/hard-wired-politics-what-about-changers/#comment-341147</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[IGotBupkis, Legally Defined Cyberbully in All 57 States]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 12 Apr 2012 00:43:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://neoneocon.com/?p=15417#comment-341147</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[&#062;&#062;&#062; &lt;i&gt;I’m pretty sure you wont find nutjobs living in an african village who want to force their neighbors into smaller huts in order to save the planet.&lt;/i&gt;

No, they&#039;re a lot more likely to want to force their neighbors into smaller huts in order to provide themselves with a bigger hut.

:D]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&gt;&gt;&gt; <i>I’m pretty sure you wont find nutjobs living in an african village who want to force their neighbors into smaller huts in order to save the planet.</i></p>
<p>No, they&#8217;re a lot more likely to want to force their neighbors into smaller huts in order to provide themselves with a bigger hut.</p>
<p>😀</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: IGotBupkis, Legally Defined Cyberbully in All 57 States		</title>
		<link>https://thenewneo.com/2012/04/10/hard-wired-politics-what-about-changers/#comment-341141</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[IGotBupkis, Legally Defined Cyberbully in All 57 States]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 12 Apr 2012 00:39:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://neoneocon.com/?p=15417#comment-341141</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[&#062;&#062;&#062; &lt;i&gt;in mathematical terms, the profound state of love. Or it’s opposite, hate. &lt;/i&gt;

While I concur with your basic thesis, this comparison is inaccurate, as many before me have noted on the subject.

Love and Hate are both proximately similar emotions, both being based on a somewhat obsessive focus on a single individual, group, or credo. The only distinction really between the two is if the obsession is a positive or negative one.

No, the actual &quot;opposite&quot; of love/hate is apathy: &quot;My lack of interest in the subject/object borders on the supernatural&quot;. 

&quot;If it ceased to exist, I would not care. If it was wildly successful, I would not care. As a matter of fact, if no one ever mentioned its existence to me ever again, I would likely never ever waste a fraction of a moment&#039;s thought on it.&quot;

THAT is the true opposite of love/hate.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&gt;&gt;&gt; <i>in mathematical terms, the profound state of love. Or it’s opposite, hate. </i></p>
<p>While I concur with your basic thesis, this comparison is inaccurate, as many before me have noted on the subject.</p>
<p>Love and Hate are both proximately similar emotions, both being based on a somewhat obsessive focus on a single individual, group, or credo. The only distinction really between the two is if the obsession is a positive or negative one.</p>
<p>No, the actual &#8220;opposite&#8221; of love/hate is apathy: &#8220;My lack of interest in the subject/object borders on the supernatural&#8221;. </p>
<p>&#8220;If it ceased to exist, I would not care. If it was wildly successful, I would not care. As a matter of fact, if no one ever mentioned its existence to me ever again, I would likely never ever waste a fraction of a moment&#8217;s thought on it.&#8221;</p>
<p>THAT is the true opposite of love/hate.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Jan of MN		</title>
		<link>https://thenewneo.com/2012/04/10/hard-wired-politics-what-about-changers/#comment-341044</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Jan of MN]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 11 Apr 2012 20:19:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://neoneocon.com/?p=15417#comment-341044</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[It&#039;s hard to leave this subject alone!  I see liberalism as another kind of faith, grounded in hope. While conservatism is more likely to be associated with religious faith, it is also more tied to practical solutions based on observed previous outcomes.  So that&#039;s my bias.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It&#8217;s hard to leave this subject alone!  I see liberalism as another kind of faith, grounded in hope. While conservatism is more likely to be associated with religious faith, it is also more tied to practical solutions based on observed previous outcomes.  So that&#8217;s my bias.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Commenter formerly know as roc scssrs		</title>
		<link>https://thenewneo.com/2012/04/10/hard-wired-politics-what-about-changers/#comment-341036</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Commenter formerly know as roc scssrs]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 11 Apr 2012 19:45:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://neoneocon.com/?p=15417#comment-341036</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Jonathan Haidt is really good on this, and has a new book out. 

From http://www.edge.org/3rd_culture/haidt08/haidt08_index.html:

&quot;In several large internet surveys, my collaborators Jesse Graham, Brian Nosek and I have found that people who call themselves strongly liberal endorse statements related to the harm/care and fairness/reciprocity foundations, and they largely reject statements related to ingroup/loyalty, authority/respect, and purity/sanctity. People who call themselves strongly conservative, in contrast, endorse statements related to all five foundations more or less equally. (You can test yourself at www.YourMorals.org.) We think of the moral mind as being like an audio equalizer, with five slider switches for different parts of the moral spectrum. Democrats generally use a much smaller part of the spectrum than do Republicans.&quot;]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Jonathan Haidt is really good on this, and has a new book out. </p>
<p>From <a href="http://www.edge.org/3rd_culture/haidt08/haidt08_index.html" rel="nofollow ugc">http://www.edge.org/3rd_culture/haidt08/haidt08_index.html</a>:</p>
<p>&#8220;In several large internet surveys, my collaborators Jesse Graham, Brian Nosek and I have found that people who call themselves strongly liberal endorse statements related to the harm/care and fairness/reciprocity foundations, and they largely reject statements related to ingroup/loyalty, authority/respect, and purity/sanctity. People who call themselves strongly conservative, in contrast, endorse statements related to all five foundations more or less equally. (You can test yourself at <a href="http://www.YourMorals.org" rel="nofollow ugc">http://www.YourMorals.org</a>.) We think of the moral mind as being like an audio equalizer, with five slider switches for different parts of the moral spectrum. Democrats generally use a much smaller part of the spectrum than do Republicans.&#8221;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Charles		</title>
		<link>https://thenewneo.com/2012/04/10/hard-wired-politics-what-about-changers/#comment-340980</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Charles]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 11 Apr 2012 18:08:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://neoneocon.com/?p=15417#comment-340980</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Argh!  I tried reading that article and just couldn&#039;t get past the first page - it is such nonsense.

Trimegistus says exactly how I feel about this:

&lt;i&gt;&quot; . . . attempts to “pathologize” conservatives and conservative ideas [are] very very creepy indeed.&quot;&lt;/i&gt;

Very well put!

However, I do not see liberal and conservative as being &quot;set in stone.&quot; 

I do believe there was a time when liberal truly meant open-minded and subject to change; whereas nowadays I see so many who call themselves liberal being very set against new ideas.  The same was once true of conservative; except it was the opposite.

So, Neo, here&#039;s my question for you:

&lt;b&gt;To paraphrase Ronald Reagan - Did you leave liberalism or did liberalism leave you?&lt;/b&gt;]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Argh!  I tried reading that article and just couldn&#8217;t get past the first page &#8211; it is such nonsense.</p>
<p>Trimegistus says exactly how I feel about this:</p>
<p><i>&#8221; . . . attempts to “pathologize” conservatives and conservative ideas [are] very very creepy indeed.&#8221;</i></p>
<p>Very well put!</p>
<p>However, I do not see liberal and conservative as being &#8220;set in stone.&#8221; </p>
<p>I do believe there was a time when liberal truly meant open-minded and subject to change; whereas nowadays I see so many who call themselves liberal being very set against new ideas.  The same was once true of conservative; except it was the opposite.</p>
<p>So, Neo, here&#8217;s my question for you:</p>
<p><b>To paraphrase Ronald Reagan &#8211; Did you leave liberalism or did liberalism leave you?</b></p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: J.J. formerly Jimmy J.		</title>
		<link>https://thenewneo.com/2012/04/10/hard-wired-politics-what-about-changers/#comment-340973</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[J.J. formerly Jimmy J.]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 11 Apr 2012 17:34:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://neoneocon.com/?p=15417#comment-340973</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[neo, 
Agreed that  Brock is apparently an opportunist. He seems to enjoy  savaging people. Whether from the right  or left depends on which side strokes his ego properly. An analogy might be a bisexual who chooses partners depending on the amount  of ego gratification provided. No real loyalty - only goes where he gets the most strokes. I wonder what percentage of humans are this way?]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>neo,<br />
Agreed that  Brock is apparently an opportunist. He seems to enjoy  savaging people. Whether from the right  or left depends on which side strokes his ego properly. An analogy might be a bisexual who chooses partners depending on the amount  of ego gratification provided. No real loyalty &#8211; only goes where he gets the most strokes. I wonder what percentage of humans are this way?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Trimegistus		</title>
		<link>https://thenewneo.com/2012/04/10/hard-wired-politics-what-about-changers/#comment-340933</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Trimegistus]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 11 Apr 2012 15:02:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://neoneocon.com/?p=15417#comment-340933</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[I&#039;m torn on this issue. On one hand, I find liberal attempts to &quot;pathologize&quot; conservatives and conservative ideas very very creepy indeed.

But at the same time I do find myself wondering, because liberalism sometimes looks like a mental illness to me . . . 

Any research into the subject would tell you more about the political beliefs of the researchers than the subjects, so perhaps this is a topic we should just agree to drop.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m torn on this issue. On one hand, I find liberal attempts to &#8220;pathologize&#8221; conservatives and conservative ideas very very creepy indeed.</p>
<p>But at the same time I do find myself wondering, because liberalism sometimes looks like a mental illness to me . . . </p>
<p>Any research into the subject would tell you more about the political beliefs of the researchers than the subjects, so perhaps this is a topic we should just agree to drop.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: sergey		</title>
		<link>https://thenewneo.com/2012/04/10/hard-wired-politics-what-about-changers/#comment-340923</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[sergey]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 11 Apr 2012 14:26:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://neoneocon.com/?p=15417#comment-340923</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Study of evolutionary and developmental biology (known also as evo/devo science) convinced me in two things: every trait, morphological or behavioral alike, always has some genetic and some environmental component. But this aside, in humans there is also the most important thing usually overlooked by biologists and sociologists: the free will. Chinese understand this right. They have a proverb: you sow an act and harvest a habit; you sow a habit and harvest a trait; you sow a trait and harvest a destiny. But, alas, free will is exactly what makes scientific study in these matters impossible, because it runs against presumption of causality inherent in every scientific study. So let keep science out of this moral and philosophical discussion, because it is blind and incompetent in any humanitarian problem. Social science is oxymoron, a junk science and charlatanism. No hope it will ever improve beyond this.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Study of evolutionary and developmental biology (known also as evo/devo science) convinced me in two things: every trait, morphological or behavioral alike, always has some genetic and some environmental component. But this aside, in humans there is also the most important thing usually overlooked by biologists and sociologists: the free will. Chinese understand this right. They have a proverb: you sow an act and harvest a habit; you sow a habit and harvest a trait; you sow a trait and harvest a destiny. But, alas, free will is exactly what makes scientific study in these matters impossible, because it runs against presumption of causality inherent in every scientific study. So let keep science out of this moral and philosophical discussion, because it is blind and incompetent in any humanitarian problem. Social science is oxymoron, a junk science and charlatanism. No hope it will ever improve beyond this.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: SteveH		</title>
		<link>https://thenewneo.com/2012/04/10/hard-wired-politics-what-about-changers/#comment-340862</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[SteveH]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 11 Apr 2012 10:14:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://neoneocon.com/?p=15417#comment-340862</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[I don&#039;t think we can overlook the role prosperity plays in the making of liberals. I&#039;m pretty sure you wont find nutjobs living in an african village who want to force their neighbors into smaller huts in order to save the planet.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I don&#8217;t think we can overlook the role prosperity plays in the making of liberals. I&#8217;m pretty sure you wont find nutjobs living in an african village who want to force their neighbors into smaller huts in order to save the planet.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
